I am frequently only 95% reliable or less. This is likely a bad thing and has led me to compensate in what are probably a lot of bad ways. Among them are a general reluctance to make commitments and a fear of responsibility. Is this something fixable or something I should deal with and work around?
I don’t think reluctance to make commitments here is actually a bad patch—there’s something really mature and refreshing about someone who says, “Look, I find myself needing to cancel a lot, so I don’t want to PROMISE I’ll be there, K?”
I think it’s fixable, but it’s also possible that it’s not a super urgent priority/the most important thing for you. I’d evaluate THAT question first, and then if you decide it is important, take things slowly as you try to improve it. Expect to make mistakes, look for what actually works rather than what should work, etc.
TBH I strongly disagree with OP’s suggestion that 95% reliability is low / bad, at least read literally. I personally definitely fail verbal ‘soft commitments’ (“I expect this will be done by end of week”) with way more than 5% rate; probably more like 20-30. Part of it is being in business where hidden complexity strikes at any time, and estimating is hard; part of it is because of cultural communication norms.
If you ignore soft commitments, then the easy way to improve reliability is to make less hard commitments. Instead of “I’ll definitely be there at 9 am sharp”, say “I’ll do my best to be there at 9 am”. Manage expectations. Then if you have to message them 30 mins before that you’re stuck in traffic / running late, your reliability is not impacted.
For stuff with really hard acceptance criteria (you actually have to be there for 9 am, because the plane won’t wait), the right way to improve reliability is to build fault tolerant systems; make a soft commitment to be there an hour before, or have more people work on a problem than you expect to be necessary.
I am frequently only 95% reliable or less. This is likely a bad thing and has led me to compensate in what are probably a lot of bad ways. Among them are a general reluctance to make commitments and a fear of responsibility. Is this something fixable or something I should deal with and work around?
I don’t think reluctance to make commitments here is actually a bad patch—there’s something really mature and refreshing about someone who says, “Look, I find myself needing to cancel a lot, so I don’t want to PROMISE I’ll be there, K?”
I think it’s fixable, but it’s also possible that it’s not a super urgent priority/the most important thing for you. I’d evaluate THAT question first, and then if you decide it is important, take things slowly as you try to improve it. Expect to make mistakes, look for what actually works rather than what should work, etc.
Having a well-calibrated belief in your own reliability is better than being overconfident in yourself.
Making yourself more reliable is also an improvement. Whether that improvement is worth the cost is beyond my ability to guess.
TBH I strongly disagree with OP’s suggestion that 95% reliability is low / bad, at least read literally. I personally definitely fail verbal ‘soft commitments’ (“I expect this will be done by end of week”) with way more than 5% rate; probably more like 20-30. Part of it is being in business where hidden complexity strikes at any time, and estimating is hard; part of it is because of cultural communication norms.
If you ignore soft commitments, then the easy way to improve reliability is to make less hard commitments. Instead of “I’ll definitely be there at 9 am sharp”, say “I’ll do my best to be there at 9 am”. Manage expectations. Then if you have to message them 30 mins before that you’re stuck in traffic / running late, your reliability is not impacted.
For stuff with really hard acceptance criteria (you actually have to be there for 9 am, because the plane won’t wait), the right way to improve reliability is to build fault tolerant systems; make a soft commitment to be there an hour before, or have more people work on a problem than you expect to be necessary.